Guideline No. 18 - The advertising of Cosmetic products which make a direct comparison with prescription medicines

While certain puffery is allowed for cosmetic
advertisements, care is needed not to compare the cosmetic with
prescription medicines like collagen injections, or Botox
injections, which are medicines that are approved for a
therapeutic purpose. Any comparison with the approved
therapeutic indication of the medicine would by implication
suggest that the cosmetic advertised could be used for this
therapeutic purpose, or imply a therapeutic outcome similar to
the approved product. It is likely that there would be no
robust clinical evidence to support this implied claim.

For instance injectible Collagen products are registered
medicines for appearance medicine treatment. Any product
comparison with injectible collagen fillers would make the
product a medicine by association and Ministerial Consent would
be required.

Similarly Botox injections are registered for the treatment
of frown lines and crows feet around the eyes. A product
comparison that by implication claims these effects and
mentions Botox would also require Ministerial consent.

For this reason all reference to collagen injections and
Botox injections should be omitted from cosmetic advertising,
otherwise the products advertised will be claiming a
therapeutic purpose by implication, and the advertising would
breach Sec 20 of the Medicines Act 1981.

Imagery that includes things like hypodermic syringes could
further strengthen the association and the implied
claim.

There is also the issue of compliance with Principle 3
of the ASA Code with reference to a depiction which portrays an
unrealistic outcome. It could be stretching credibility
to imply that the cosmetic will have the same effect as the
injection. Arguably use of the cosmetic might lessen the
chances of needing collagen injections or Botox injections at a
later stage and perhaps this is the angle that needs to take in
this advertising.

When the cosmetic advertisement specifically names the
approved medicine, and is not specific about the comparison,
then this is misleading, and it could also be in breach of the
Comparative code, especially if the comparison denigrates the
approved medicine.

The NZ Codes are quite strict about misleading claims and
social responsibility, and it would be wise to avoid comparing
a cosmetic with a prescription medicine and implying the same
result. Such an advert would be open to complaint at the ASCB
and would have a strong chance of being upheld.